Do Generalisation Results Generalise?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
A large language model's (LLM's) out-of-distribution (OOD) generalisation ability is crucial to its deployment. Previous work assessing LLMs' generalisation performance, however, typically focuses on a single out-of-distribution dataset. This approach may fail to precisely evaluate the capabilities of the model, as the data shifts encountered once a model is deployed are much more diverse. In this work, we investigate whether OOD generalisation results generalise. More specifically, we evaluate a model's performance across multiple OOD testsets throughout a finetuning run; we then evaluate the partial correlation of performances across these testsets, regressing out in-domain performance. This allows us to assess how correlated are generalisation performances once in-domain performance is controlled for. Analysing OLMo2 and OPT, we observe no overarching trend in generalisation results: the existence of a positive or negative correlation between any two OOD testsets depends strongly on the specific choice of model analysed.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Dec 2025.
Builds on
28 of 40 references.
References · 28
- 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,899
- 2022OPT: Open Pre-trained Transformer Language Modelscited by 3,512
- 2017A Broad-Coverage Challenge Corpus for Sentence Understanding through Inferencecited by 2,682
- 2015A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inferencecited by 1,847
- 2020Making Pre-trained Language Models Better Few-shot Learnerscited by 1,256
- 2020Exploiting Cloze Questions for Few Shot Text Classification and Natural Language Inferencecited by 938
- 2019Right for the Wrong Reasons: Diagnosing Syntactic Heuristics in Natural Language Inferencecited by 876
- 2019Adversarial NLI: A New Benchmark for Natural Language Understandingcited by 807
- 2020Measuring Robustness to Natural Distribution Shifts in Image Classificationcited by 454
- 2019PAWS: Paraphrase Adversaries from Word Scramblingcited by 402
- 2022WANLI: Worker and AI Collaboration for Natural Language Inference Dataset Creationcited by 202
- 2021Raise a Child in Large Language Model: Towards Effective and Generalizable Fine-tuningcited by 146
16 more
- 2023Few-shot Fine-tuning vs. In-context Learning: A Fair Comparison and Evaluationcited by 136
- 2020Automatically Identifying Words That Can Serve as Labels for Few-Shot Text Classificationcited by 98
- 2022State-of-the-art generalisation research in NLP: A taxonomy and reviewcited by 98
- 2023Revisiting Out-of-distribution Robustness in NLP: Benchmark, Analysis, and LLMs Evaluationscited by 97
- 2022GLUE-X: Evaluating Natural Language Understanding Models from an Out-of-distribution Generalization Perspectivecited by 72
- 2021Generalization in NLI: Ways (Not) To Go Beyond Simple Heuristicscited by 67
- 2021An Investigation of the (In)effectiveness of Counterfactually Augmented Datacited by 42
- 2024Unveiling the Generalization Power of Fine-Tuned Large Language Modelscited by 36
- 2024How to Compute the Probability of a Wordcited by 36
- 2023Koala: An Index for Quantifying Overlaps with Pre-training Corporacited by 19
- 2024Understanding and Mitigating Tokenization Bias in Language Modelscited by 18
- 2023The Validity of Evaluation Results: Assessing Concurrence Across Compositionality Benchmarkscited by 12
- 2021Investigating the Effect of Natural Language Explanations on Out-of-Distribution Generalization in Few-shot NLIcited by 7
- 2025Evaluating the Generalization Capabilities of Large Language Models on Code Reasoningcited by 7
- 2023Whispers of Doubt Amidst Echoes of Triumph in NLP Robustnesscited by 5
- 2024Comparative Analysis of Different Efficient Fine Tuning Methods of Large Language Models (LLMs) in Low-Resource Settingcited by 5
Built on by
Not cited yet.